Indo-Us Nuke Deal

The Indo-US Nuclear Deal

The 123-agreement and the Hyde Act have been agitating the minds of the people like us for quite some time. One thing, the Government of India went on with the deal without letting the public know what was brewing. It was only through newspaper articles that we have come to understand a few facts about the “deal”. As far as I can gather, it is a pure business deal for the US, without any generous, munificent intention as was the case with PL480 which some people are bringing up to showcase the magnanimous attitude of the USA towards India.
Out of many articles, I refer to two recent write-ups in The Statesman of September 16 and 17 (go to site below) http://www.thestatesman.net/page.archive.php?usrsess=1645174461507&date=2007-09-16
The first is entitled “The Nuke Deal” in two parts (16 and 17 Sep) by Muchkund Dubey, a former Foreign Secretary of India and the other “Why the Nuclear Deal is opposed” (16 Sep) by Gurudas Dasguota, a CPI MP. The first supports the “deal” and the second opposes it.
The two-part article “The Nuke Deal” (16 & 17 Sep) by Muchkund Dubey supports the Indo-Us Nuclear Deal on the ground that it will increase Indo-Us military cooperation but does not specify what our gains will be in the matter of energy production or how it will affect our economy. He says “For one thing, the implementation of the 123-Agreement will give a fillip to military cooperation”. He also says: “Unfortunately the Left parties have taken a very negative view of the recent improvements in the Indo-US relations. The concern seems to arise from the basic anti-American attitude rather than being based on a careful calculation of where our national interest lies.”
. . The leftist bloc may be opposing the deal from a political, anti-American standpoint, but it is also true that the rest of the political parties, particularly the Congress are behaving like a bull in the arena with the eyes focused on the (communist) red flag. That there are some positive points in the leftists’ negative stand has been clearly brought out in the article of Gurudas Dasgupta “Why the nuclear deal is opposed” (Perspective:16 Sep).(Same issue as Dubey’s). Firstly he points out that the present Indo-US Nuke-deal will be worth only seven percent of India’s total power generation. He has also shown by facts and figures that economically it will be devastating for India. I quote him: “Apart from political implications the deal must appear to be economically justified. Nuclear power generation with imported reactors will be of high cost loaded with high debt burden. The massive investment that is needed is unlikely to be sustainable, may even starve the different sectors of the economy…..It is estimated that Rs. 2 lakh crores is needed for the purchase of the reactors and Rs. 8 lakh crores for the downstream industry. It is highly improbable that the economy will be able to bear such heavy burden of repayment…..If we accept the government’s figures, the imported reactors will be able to produce an additional 13000 MW power…..A country having a budget of not more than 6.5 lakh crores cannot afford to incur a debt of nearly Rs. 10 lakh crores for the manufacture of only 13000 MW when the total generation in 2020 is likely to be 1.5 lakh (150000) MW…. For only 7 per cent of the total generation should we invest so heavily?”
(1 lakh= 100000; 1 lakh crore = 1 million million)
What he has not written is that it will be a much-needed boost for the US-economy after its misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan – because not only of the import of expensive light-water (normal-water) reactors, but also of future import of fuel and components by India from the US..
Again, though India will not be supplied with nuclear reactors or fuel for military purpose, yet it will be subject to inspections by the IAEA who may impose new restrictions on our defence-production – is being done to Iran and North Korea, and Iraq in the past. An interesting question here is “does the IAEA inspect the nuclear installations of US, UK or France? And impose restrictions?” Not by any stretch of imagination. Jeremy Seabrooke laments: “the US, the only power ever to have used nuclear weapons is now the arbiter of who may and who may not possess them”
Now, why does the Government of India, in spite of the negative points, want to go for the import of expensive light-water reactors, thus tying itself to the USA for future supply of fuel and components, in spite of the fact that it will hurt the Indian economy grievously? The answer is that our government has been gullible in the past when it was duped into buying a second-hand warship for a whooping $50 million, as it is being naive now in believing that the present nuclear deal with the US will bring a renaissance to India, as also it is being tricked into “lending” its much-valued Foreign Exchange Reserve to unscrupulous parties.
I think, The ‘deal” is just another way of getting round the refusal of India to sign the Nuclear non-proliferation Treaty and roping India in finally to the same predicament by another route..

Comments welcome

Letters to the Public Editor

I am in habit of shooting off Letters to the Editor whenever my mind is disturbed by the unjust happenings that we find in the newspaper or when I have an opinion on the subject that I want to ventilate. Here are some letters that were NOT published by the Editor, The Statesman, Kolkata. I post these letters for the attention of the PUBLIC EDITOR.
Commenst are, as usual, welcome.
Thanks for the comments.

(1)

In his two-part article "Judicial Power"(29 & 30 April), the eminent jurist Mr. Fali S. Nariman has given us a quotable quote :"Freedom – freedom for citizens like you and me – can only be secured through Courts – not through Parliament or through executive governments".
However, he also praised the Speaker Mr. Somnath Chatterji: "The fact that it (the Parliament) at the instance of the Hon'ble Speaker contemplated action with such promptitude in the recent human trafficking scandal in which some MPs are allegedly involved is a good sign." Surely he was not saying this in jest; more likely it was to keep the Speaker in good humour, knowing that in the Parliament the Speaker keeps company with a large number of hardened criminals. Telling just one Katara not to come to the Parliament when he had not yet been tried for his 'alleged' offence is hardly a way to take remedial action. Again, that he did not do the same to Sahabuddin when he was convicted and sentenced to Life imprisonment shows his double standard of justice. Of course, Katara belongs to the BJP and it was not possible for the BJP to do anything about it; but Sahabuddin belongs to Lallu Yadav's party which can pull down the government and, with it, Somnathbabu down from his exalted seat.
Discretion being the better part of valour, we appreciate the Speaker's 'judgment'.


(2)
(3)
Your story "Changing Court " in 8th Day(13 May) lays bare the shameless sycophancy of Sunil Gangopadhyay and his ilk among the so called 'intellectuals'. But all is not lost; there are still some conscientious poets, actors and other creative artists who genuinely feel that the incident at Nadigram was a terrible carnage and an inhuman act. The reputed poet Joy Goswami's set of poems entitled " Banglar gaa theke rakto gorhiye porhchhe" published in a Bengali magazine creates imagery where one can almost visualize the blood dripping down. So, not every poet has sold his soul to the devil.
Sunil Gangopadhyay has said that "Nandigram has been made into such a big issue". Well, the followers of the BJP may similarly say that the Babri Masjid or Gujarat incidents have been blown out of proportion.
However we are not surprised that a literary celebrity can stoop so low; we have seen how the rich and famous people used to lick the boots of the British rulers for titles like Rai Bahadur, Khan Bahadur etc. So, it is no wonder that our one-time Sheriff Sunil-babu would do the same for the rulers in search of their patronage. It reminds us of some lines from Gray's 'Elegy' : "The struggling pangs of conscious truth to hide/To quench the blushes of ingenuous shame,/Or heap the shrine of Luxury and Pride / With incense kindled at the Muse's flame."
Well, does Sunil-babu 'blush with ingenuous shame'?

(4)
Your editorial "Anyone but a politician"(22 May) is both rational and timely. What you have written about the past Presidents is very correct. In fact the trend to elect trusted politicians was broken by the NDA when they surprisingly elected the apolitical and a distinguished scientist as the present President, ostensibly to prove the secular credentials of the BJP.
Be that as it may, we must not forget that the President is elected entirely by the politicians, and we, the ordinary people have no say in the matter. It is only natural that they will elect a politician, and a pliant one at that, who will not try to upset the apple cart of the politicians, as the Supreme Court is doing in defending the Constitution. The President, after all, has necessarily to be a rubber stamp of the Parliament, as
In the jumble of names suggested for Presidency, two names are conspicuous by their absence, viz Jyoti Basu and Sonia Gandhi, possibly because they may not be as acquiescent to the Parliament's decisions as, for example, the present incumbent has been.//-->
Dr.APJ Abdul Kalam has been, and not unnecessarily delay signing dubious bills like the 'Office of Profit' bill, nor will decide things in a hurry such as the prayer of clemency from Afzal Guru. This has been beautifully portrayed in his cartoon (22May) by Mr. Rajinder Puri.
In the jumble of names suggested for Presidency, two names are conspicuous by their absence, viz Jyoti Basu and Sonia Gandhi, possibly because they may not be as acquiescent to the Parliament's decisions as, for example, the present incumbent has been.
(5)
This refers to the letters of Mihir Kanungo (12 May) and Rabindranath Sarkar (30 May), on the subject of "reservation" or the quota system. All right-thinking persons agree that the caste system is bad, but on what basis can one say, like Mr. Sarkar, that caste-based reservation is a tool to eradicate the caste system?. It is merely a hypothesis and a conjecture not based on facts. Had it been true, the caste-based reservation would have wiped out the caste system in these 60 years of the quota system..
Like Mr. Sarkar, everybody wants "to free the society from the caste-system" but "reservation" is not the panacea for all the evils that the caste-system has created in the society. Also, his sweeping remark that "the caste-system is the catalytic agent of all inequalities" is highly debatable. He is missing the woods for the trees.
We agree that the Indian society, like societies in other countries of the world, is not egalitarian. And, the world over the society is divided between people who have money (and power) and those who are deprived, between the educated and the unlettered, between the high (by being brilliant and famous though not necessarily rich) and the low. Caste-system adds another dimension to this inequality in India, but is not the only and not even the major factor. Severe inequality exists even where there is no caste-system, like, for example, in the U.S.A. or Russia . So, if any government or society is serious about removing or reducing this inequality, it will strike the malady at the root by providing education to the deprived – not by getting them into IIT, IIM, ISI or AIIMS by quota system where they will feel inferior, and be discriminated against -- but by providing enough opportunity for their education through special schools, so that their academic level comes up so as to enable them to get into these institutions through open competition.
But, may be, I am missing the point. The whole thing is not about removing the caste-system, but to carefully nurture it so as to maintain the vote-bank.